Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bainbridge Planning Commission continues comp‑plan hearing after strong public push to restore higher FAR for Winslow
Summary
At a May 14 public hearing on proposed comprehensive plan and Winslow subarea updates, staff outlined capacity estimates showing a 64‑unit shortfall for lower‑income multifamily housing. Speakers urged restoring the commission’s earlier bonus floor‑area‑ratio recommendations; the commission continued the hearing to May 21 and voted to ask council to reconsider its FAR changes.
The Bainbridge Island Planning Commission opened a combined public hearing May 14 on two ordinances to adopt the 2026 periodic update to the comprehensive plan and related implementing code changes for the Winslow subarea. Senior planner Jennifer Sutton described changes to the Winslow Town Center boundaries, the elimination of the R‑14 zone and proposed code updates, and outlined a land‑capacity table that shows an estimated 64‑dwelling‑unit deficit in low‑ and mid‑rise multifamily housing affordable at or below 80% of area median income.
Why it matters: the draft updates are intended to help the city meet new state housing requirements and local affordability goals while balancing environmental constraints such as groundwater. Several speakers told the commission that the council’s recent reduction of recommended bonus floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) caps to 2.5 undermines private development’s ability to deliver mixed‑income housing without substantial public subsidy.
“Those who make this island function — teachers, grocery clerks, caregivers, tradespeople — cannot afford to live here,” said John Flodine, who identified himself as a longtime renter. “Our zoning policies tell a different story.”
Staff summary and caveats
Jennifer Sutton, the city’s senior planner, told commissioners the capacity estimates account for a recently recommended mandatory inclusionary program applied to properties two acres or larger within Winslow Town Center zones and do not assume significant participation in voluntary bonus programs. "The table shows a 64 dwelling unit deficit of estimated low and mid‑rise multifamily in Winslow for households at or below 80% AMI," Sutton said, and warned some larger properties in the zones are constrained by public ownership or critical‑area restrictions.
Public testimony: consistent themes
More than two dozen speakers delivered public comment. Many urged restoring the commission’s earlier recommendation for larger bonus FAR and height incentives — often citing a 2019 EcoNorthwest analysis referenced in the hearing record — arguing that higher bonuses are necessary to make privately led inclusionary development financially viable without full public subsidy.
Phaedra Elliott, executive director of Housing Resources Bainbridge, told the commission that HRB supports both voluntary and mandatory inclusionary programs but that relying primarily on 100%‑affordable projects will require local capital the city does not currently have. “Building affordable housing is difficult and expensive,” Elliott said, adding that HRB depends on philanthropic and other gap funding to make projects feasible.
Environmental and infrastructure concerns about spreading development into the conservation zone were a recurring counterpoint. David Martz cited the Bainbridge Island Land Trust and the groundwater analysis to argue that directing growth to Winslow, where infrastructure already exists, would reduce environmental impacts and protect aquifers. "Single‑family homes consume twice the water of multifamily housing," Martz said, summarizing a point raised repeatedly during the hearing.
Other speakers — including developers, business owners and park district representatives — urged the commission to balance incentives with site‑specific concerns such as parking, ferry‑terminal operations, and park zoning standards. Bill Eiseley, a retired architect, proposed siting affordable housing above a new downtown parking structure as an alternative to a contested site on Winslow Way.
Actions and next steps
Commissioners voted to continue the combined public hearing on Ordinances 2026‑04 and 2026‑05 to the Planning Commission meeting on May 21 to allow the public and commissioners more time to review documents released earlier in the week. A majority of commissioners also approved a motion asking the City Council to reconsider its recent changes to the commission’s recommended bonus FAR (restoring the commission’s earlier incentive levels in the Ferry and High School Road districts). The council‑reconsideration motion passed 4–0 with one abstention.
The commission will hear additional testimony and deliberate further at its May 21 meeting. Staff emphasized they will be available to answer questions, and several commissioners said they plan continued work on groundwater and district‑level master planning to resolve infrastructure, form and density concerns.
A note on sources: quotes and attributions come from the Planning Commission’s meeting record and public testimony delivered May 14, 2026.
